Lindsay Clancy lawyer urges judge to dismiss case or put it back on trial

Lindsay Clancy's lawyer has urged a judge to either dismiss the murder charges against her or put her back on trial.

Warning: This story contains details that may be distressing for some readers.

A hearing held on Monday, November 2, in Plymouth, Massachusetts, marked the second time Ms Clancy has been in court since a mistrial was declared, after jurors were unable to agree whether she was legally responsible for killing her three young children.

In September, the jury was split 11-1 in favour of acquittal.

Ms Clancy's defence team moved to dismiss the murder changes on double jeopardy grounds, arguing the conditions for declaring a mistrial were not met.

Under US law a mistrial can only be declared if every other option to proceed has been exhausted.

Ms Clancy's lawyers argued the judge should have removed a juror who favoured conviction, and then allowed jury deliberation to continue.

Judge William Sullivan did not immediately rule on Monday.

Ms Clancy's lawyer, Kevin Reddington, implored him to decide quickly.

He also pressed the Plymouth District Attorney, Timothy Cruz, to reveal whether he plans to try Clancy on murder charges again.

"I am not going to have this woman sit incarcerated for the next year, or two or three," Mr Reddington said.

"I want a trial and I want it with you and I want it this spring."

Judge Sullivan scheduled another hearing for November 16, and the prosecution said it intends to retry Ms Clancy if the case proceeds.

He also suggested a new trial could be held in March next year.

What happens to Lindsay Clancy now?

Mr Cruz is yet to announce whether prosecutors would ‌retry Ms Clancy on first-degree murder charges, which carry a mandatory sentence of life in prison without parole if she were ‌convicted.

Prosecutors have several options before them, including seeking her conviction on lesser second-degree murder charges, which would give her the option to waive a jury trial and proceed before ‌a judge.

Ms Clancy has been held in a state psychiatric hospital in Massachusetts before and during trial and would remain in custody through a second trial.

Clancy lawyers argue case should have been dismissed

Ms Clancy's lawyers argued a mistrial could have been avoided had the judge been more thorough interrogating jurors about their breakdown in deliberations.

The jury's foreperson sent two notes indicating that a lone juror, Michael Desronvil, wasn't following the court's instruction to follow the rules regarding reasonable doubt.

After receiving the notes, Judge Sullivan spoke with each juror, reminded them of their duties and explained what constitutes reasonable doubt. He asked whether they could apply the law to the case, and all said yes.

Mr Reddington urged the judge to investigate Mr Desronvil, who he accused of being untruthful on his jury questionnaire and improperly using his phone during jury deliberations.

Judge Sullivan told Mr Reddington to stop using the juror's name in open court; he had placed a standing order to seal the names of the jurors to protect them from abuse.

However a number of jurors, including Mr Desronvil, had done interviews in the media, which led Mr Reddington to say that the juror's name "was all over the internet".

"Why don't we all dial this back a little bit," Judge Sullivan said.

Prosecutor Jennifer Sprague said the judge had struck the right balance.

"It is clear from the record this juror did not refuse to deliberate. He refused to agree," Ms Sprague said.

Mr Desronvil said in an interview he was certain of Ms Clancy's guilt, but other jurors wouldn't listen.

His lawyer, Heather O'Connor, urged the judge on Monday not to investigate his conduct any further, saying he had simply done his duty as a juror.

She also disputed the allegations of improper phone use.

"If that's enough to put a juror under oath, to search their phone, to pull their history, then the lesson [for] every future juror in this Commonwealth is simple: Agree with the majority or potentially be investigated," Ms O'Connor said.